Disadvantages Prescriptivism has a few disadvantages to it that could make it an inadequate attitude for certain settings. This attitude is not conducive to creative writing as it makes it can make it difficult for writers to freely express themselves creatively. It can be challenging for non-native speakers or low level educated people to understand a person with a prescriptive attitude to writing and speaking, as the writer will most likely use an extensive range of vocabulary. Advantages A prescriptive attitude can be good for formal settings as it presents a clear and precise way of writing and speaking, as grammar and language rules are followed strictly. Being prescriptive can show that a person is educated and has mastered the English language.
There is no formal form when using spoken English. People tend to speak quickly with “slang” terms whereas legal English is meant to be read slow and concise so as to understand all the legal lingo. Gillian Brown states in her book, Listen to Spoken English, that, “most public speakers have adapted a more ‘chatty’ style in which the speaker tends to project a more friendly, accessible image.” Spoken English has very much strayed away from the slow precise speech that legal English is very much comprised of but rather an informal conversation among friends. One thing that spoken English has that isn’t conveyed well through legal writing is the rhythm that creates it. “The rhythm of English is based on the contrast of stressed and unstressed syllables.” (Brown, 42) The use of stressed and unstressed syllables helps the listener understand the context and meaning behind what is being spoken.
Whilst speech is perceived by the ears, group chats are perceived by the eyes. As can be seen from above, there are similarities between netspeak and e-communication. However, there is evidently more differences between them as they are separate modes of communication. It can be seen that group chats would have the most similar traits to spoken language in comparison to other traditional
The term 'non-verbal communications' tends to be used in a wider sense, and all these terms are somewhat vague. For the purposes of this article, the terms 'body language' and 'non verbal communications' are broadly interchangeable. This guide also takes the view that body language/non-verbal communications is the study of how people communicate face-to-face aside from the spoken words themselves, and in this respect the treatment of the subject here is broader than typical body language guides limited merely to body positions and gestures. If you carry out any serious analysis or discussion you shoul d clarify
LINGUISTIC POLITENESS In this world, everyone speaks every day. They use many tones of spoken whether the tone good to hear or not. It looks like something small and nothing to concern about but actually the way someone talk show his/her attitudes. Linguistic politeness is the way a person talks with her/his surroundings. From my observation, linguistic politeness is a good manner where it used to express the concern to others and to minimize threat to self-esteem in real life.
According to Oxford dictionary (2015), the speech was defined as the expression of or the ability to express thoughts and feelings by articulate sounds. As for writing, it was defined as a sequence of letters, words, or symbols marked on a surface. Speech and writing are both crucial methods to interact with people. However, which one is better? Personally, I think that speech is better than writing because of its advantages.
After comparing several works regarding the functions of actually, there seems to be a consensus that the discourse marker actually is, like most other markers, multifunctional. However, an exact meaning might not be identifiable as “it is often difficult to distinguish the discourse [marker] from the adverb” (Aijmer 2002: 253). The pre-definition of broad functions of the discourse marker shall make it easier to find them in VOICE. Furthermore, the discourse markers’ flexibility in regard to their position within an utterance (Ajimer 2003: 256), can help to identify them. Also Degand & Simon-Vandenbergen (2011: 288) found that “they can also be very versatile and occur in medial as well as final position”.
It is a kind of talking to oneself, not intended to affect others.” According to J. Mukarovsky, a dialogue always rests on the polarity or suspense between “several or at least two contextures” which “interpenetrate and alternate in dialogic discourse”: “Because there is more than one participant in a dialogue, there is also a manifold contexture: although each person’s utterances alternate with those of the other person or persons, they comprise a certain unity of meaning. Because the contextures which interpenetrate in this way in a dialogue are different, often even contradictory, sharp semantic reversals occur on the boundaries of the individual replies. The more vivid the dialogue, the shorter the individual replies, and the more distinct the collisions of the
A character’s voice can be used very effectively to tell the story of that character without actually going into detail about the character and their background. Throughout this essay, I make this argument by dissecting two passages from Zadie Smith’s book On Beauty. When you read a book, you make assumptions about characters and their background based on the way they are described, their actions and their context. If you read a passage of thought or speech from a character most people will begin to make assumptions about them and form pictures of them in their mind purely based off of their style of speech, or their ‘voice’. The manipulation of syntax is effective when creating the ‘voice’ of a character.
Readers read aloud effortlessly and with expression. Their reading sounds natural, as if they are speaking. Readers who have not yet developed fluency read slowly, word by word. Their oral reading is choppy and plodding. Fluency is important because it provides a bridge between word recognition and comprehension.